More Studies Say That Professors Are Lefties

THIS ISN’T news. But Critical Review has just published a couple of scholarly papers that find university professors to be overwhelmingly Democrat in political orientation.

In Faculty Partisan Affiliations in All Disciplines Christopher F. Cardiff and Daniel B. Klein demonstrate that, yes, university faculty are overwhelmingly liberal and Democrat in partisan affiliation.

But the affiliation is not uniform. Liberal arts and humanities faculties are overwhelmingly left-wing. Business faculties are almost balanced in orientation. Democrat to Republican weighting ranges “from sociology (44:1) to management (1.5:1).”

It would be interesting to know how much the affiliation correlates with government grants. Sociology, for instance, is a discipline almost completely oriented towards government organization of society. Management is almost completely oriented towards business organization. You would expect sociologists to be oriented towards government spending, and business faculty less so.

In Professors and Their Politics Daniel B. Klein and Charlotta Stern takes a look not at the party affiliation but the policy views of professors. They find that professors, both Democrat and Republican, “favor government action more than the ideal types might suggest.”

Ideological diversity (as judged not only by voting behavior, but by policy views) is by far the greatest within economics. Social scientists who deviate from left-wing views are as likely to be libertarian as conservative.

Our environmental friends have something to say about this uniformity. It is dangerous for the planet. Diversity is essential for sustainability and indeed for simple survival. So when we see uniformity and monoculture our warning flags should be posted.

The question is whether the response to this unhealthy uniformity should be a frontal attack, as advocated by David Horowitz and Students for Academic Freedom, or whether an indirect approach would be better.

We know from analysis of the business world that inward-looking institutions become, over time, extremely brittle and vulnerable to change. Their members start to extract more resources from the institution than is compatible with sustainable growth. Eventually, like the Soviet Union, they collapse without warning.

Of course universities (and indeed all the education system) operates not on a profitability model but a political support model. They attract resources not by offering a superior product and low prices but by a combination of cultural and political power. People are taught to revere educational institutions and to defer to the opinions of professors. And if you cross a college professor in the public square you find that he has ways of making life difficult for you.

The problem for the education establishment is that they are spending about seven percent of GDP, and most likely wasting about 3-4 percent. Eventually that is going to cause a problem. After all, we could use that money for something useful.

Suppose you are an earnest reformer, anxious to find money to fund your vision of a better world. As you cast your eyes around for funding, wouldn’t your gaze sooner or later come to rest upon the great special interest herds of cattle grazing in tax supported pastures and not yielding very much in the way of milk or of beef?

And wouldn’t you notice that the biggest herd of all, with the most meager yield, was the education herd?

Sphere: Related Content |

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.